Charles289

People have whined for years about the cost of making Portland safe for people to ride bikes, and whined for months specifically about the $60 million building out the entire 30 year plan would cost (which is funny, in and of itself, considering that no money has been allocated to that lofty goal). This article just goes to show you the peanuts that bike spending really amounts to, in the scheme of things. It's a good return on investment (probably better than straightening one section of a highway out in the Coast Range), and inexpensive compared to the mega projects that suck the most money, the largest being the CRC boondoggle.

I think the proximate reason that fewer miners are mining these claims is that regulations are stiffer. The underlying reason that all of us people who live downstream from mines (and everyone here lives downstream from some mine) got tired of drinking all those heavy metals that careless miners dumped into our water supply! Apparently, "guys are scared to death of the fines," when really, they ought to be scared to death of running an unsafe mine. I mean, cry me a river: it's costly and time intensive to begin mining because it's a very dangerous business. If preventing the death of mine employees and preventing the poisoning of the citizens downstream isn't the thing that they worry about, then I have very little sympathy.

This farce has gone on long enough. The bridge, which is only getting rebuilt so that Vancouver will go along with Portland's plans for light rail, will end up overbudget, late, and pointless (traffic over the bridge has decreased since 2004, and the bridge is considered safer than the Marquam Bridge, so increased traffic and structural safety are not factors). Many cheaper and easier-to-implement options would help with the occasional lift or interchange problems. Why not scale down the plan to focus on a few changes that would help? End this boondoggle!

I perform all the time, and my phone never goes on stage with me. That said, people make mistakes all the time, and many of the elderly who go to concerts can't hear their phone ringing, or don't recognize it as their own. So, I'd cut them a little slack. A ringing phone is a major distraction, but hardly warrants punitive shaming or exclusion from the venue.

As of now, no government entity has appropriated any money for construction. The CRC remains an unfunded, pie-in-the-sky boondoggle, that would sap local and federal budgets. The return for this investment is, as at always is with this kind of project, years of awful traffic during construction, followed by years of traffic just like we have now. If we build it, the drivers will come. Name one highway in the Portland area that hasn't filled up over the years. If we continue to invest in gridlock, gridlock is what we'll get.

This sucks. Bennett Pass is nowhere near Pocket Creek. It'd be better to park at Teacup and take the connector trail down to Pocket Creek.
Also, they've also not plowed the Clark Creek Sno-Park this year (as of the week after Thanksgiving, when I was up there last). The Oregon Sno-Park is still a great value (compared to Washington's), but it's annoying when they change the rules mid-way through the season.

Man, ease up on Frank. He's justifiably frustrated. This park is the most obvious place to build singletrack, and yet the city is trying to shunt riders to the edges of town (Eichler, Powell Butte, Greenway). You're obviously way connected and hard at work at trying to improve the situation. That's great. You don't need to accuse Frank of anything. He's not the only frustrated rider out there.

If I've read the article correctly, Mr. Frick-Wright seems to be saying that it's okay that bikes are banned from many traditional trails, because that has spurred the construction of even better flow trails. I'd have to disagree. As much as I love the flow trails (Sandy Ridge and the user built trails around Bend are exceptional), I'd hate to say goodbye to such classic gems like the Riverside Trail, Siouxon Creek Trail, or the Larch Mountain Trail system (either in Washington or in Oregon). Those trails take us to special wild places, and are fun to ride, though more challenging.
An even more serious negative effect of losing access to these trails is that the result would be concentrating trail use at the few open trails. Imagine if everyone who gets their kicks on the Wilson River Trail suddenly had to go to Sandy Ridge instead? With an obesity epidemic and a nation that needs to get outside to value its wild areas, an increasing trail population is a good thing. But I'd hate to see that population compressed into a few purpose areas, great though they are. Our great legacy trails offer a wilder, more challenging environment for the sport, and they're too valuable to trade, even for flowy bermed goodness.

You've, managed to say, A lot without, saying much at all, and, , your use of the, comma, is fascinating. My employee manor is great, by the way- it has high ceilings, a large veranda, and, even, a, carriage, house,. All manner of conveniences.

Colleges should simply suck the NCAA dry- it gets 95% of its budget from March Madness contracts (about $1 billion). All of that is money that should belong to the colleges and their players. The colleges should kick that contract, and take the money themselves. Instead, the NCAA has a Byzantine rulebook that allows them to harass colleges for recruiting, and kick out players for selling the shirt off their own back. The whole system is corrupt- college sports are worth billions of dollars, and the young men and women working hard and risking their health aren't even allowed to make a profit from their own likeness, used in video games. The athletes create the value, and aren't allowed to enjoy any of it. The athletes are being pimped by this system. The arbitrary rules regarding recruiting and, heaven forbid, an athlete profiting from his enormous labors, are symptoms of this corrupt system.

The Forest Service is also trying out a new fee arrangement: some trailheads no longer accept a Northwest Forest Pass. Instead, you now have to pay a private contractor! I kid you not. You now have to pay a private, for-profit business to park your car and hike from the Lost Lake trailhead or the Fish Creek trailhead. The businesses now charging $5 to park don't own the land, didn't pave the lot, didn't build the trail, and aren't patrolling to make sure your car doesn't get stolen, but they'll take your money, and leave you a note telling you to pay up if you fail to.

So, why should we have to pay them? What Forest Service genius dreamed this one up? What part of this survey showed an increased need for private profit off of visitors to public lands?

It's time to start registering and licensing pedestrians. Not all pedestrians violate the rules, of course, but even other pedestrians know that their comrades are out there and they are not operating their feet in a safe manner. We have all seen you, and you know who you are. Portland pedestrians have the nicest sidewalks in the country, and they should also get to help pay for them.

1. I don't know how you think cyclists have avoided paying for the bike lanes. If riding a bike was a "get out of paying taxes card," everyone would do it. I pay taxes, therefore I pay for bike lanes. (It's untrue that our roads are paid for entirely by gas taxes).
2. Good luck licensing that five year old riding her WalMart bike down the neighborhood streets.

Good job, Oregonian. Thanks for giving a platform to a troll who probably just sits around in his undies in the basement waiting to make fun of people who are actually out doing things with their life!

This whole thing is a giant boondoggle. They should have come up with a more fiscally responsible plan years ago (like reorienting the rail bridge and adding seismic protections to the I-5 bridge). Instead, the planning firms have made their whole livelihood off planning this thing to death.
And for those of you that complain that light rail won't pay for itself- please name a road system that pays for itself! This whole thing is for Clark County commuters anyway. Oregonians are going to be subsidizing their commute for generations. Yay socialism.

Oh, and to correct the following:
"Their only real interest is in being left alone to enjoy magnificent views of the river and the port."

Not true. Their real interest seems to be having the city maintain for them a strip of parking lot in front of their house, on which they can park an SUV with the words "BLOW ME" prominently written all over it.

If you don't know what I'm talking about, just drive or ride up there once, and you'll see it. This is what our tax dollars are paying for: subsidizing the storage of private vehicles with obscenities on them.